As 2016 begins, Hillary Clinton has surpassed her $100 million fundraising goal in her bid to be America’s next president. And I keep wondering how many of her donors really know about the corruption of Clinton cash flow through the years. It’s time they not only understand where their contributions are going but also how they’ve been handled in the past.
Finances are a family affair, at least in the Clinton dynasty. Even daughter Chelsea is getting into the fundraising act. Mother and daughter co-hosted a “Family Holiday Celebration with Hillary and Chelsea” in New York City on Dec. 17. The crown of that evening came hours later when Hillary and former President Bill Clinton appeared with a performance by rock star Sting. Tickets started at $33,400 each.
Of course, Bill is no stranger to campaign fundraising sideshows. He has taken on 20 events over just the past two months to help raise dough for the former first lady.
As Bill traveled around Pennsylvania ringing in the donations for the presidential hopeful, I thought, “This seems vaguely familiar. A Clinton trying to use other people’s money to climb their way to the top.”
And then it hit me. It was Jan. 1, 1781. Fifteen-hundred Continental Army soldiers from the Pennsylvania Line were fighting mad that their superiors did not recognize the expiration of their three-year enlistment, as History.com details. After killing three officers in a drunken fury, they walked away from the Continental Army’s winter camp at Morristown, New Jersey.
That’s when British Gen. Henry Clinton dispatched his minions to try and bribe the mutineers to join the Redcoats by offering them full pardons and the pay owed them by the Continental Army. Fortunately, the mutineers didn’t take the bait. Instead, they rejoined the Continental Army and fought against Clinton until their grievances were settled with Congress. After his defeat at Yorktown in 1781, Clinton was eventually blamed for the loss of all 13 colonies.
No parallel is perfect, but political corruption finds comparisons at every turn in history. One thing is certain: Clintons have been wielding their power and cash to ensure corrupt regimes for a long time.
Peter Schweizer, the president of the Government Accountability Institute and a former William J. Casey research fellow at the Hoover Institution, wrote in his 2015 blockbuster exposé, “Clinton Cash,” how the Clintons traded political favors for donations during Hillary Clinton’s time as U.S. secretary of state.
Schweizer’s book release coincided with the New York Times‘ lengthy report about how companies with a financial connection to a Russian deal to seize some of the U.S.’ uranium deposits donated millions to the Clinton Foundation during the exact time Hillary’s State Department had to negotiate the deal.
Schweizer outlined in his own words how the Clintons facilitated deals that were handed over to Putin-controlled Russian interests:
The result: Uranium One and half of projected American uranium production were transferred to a private company controlled in turn by the Russian State Nuclear Agency. Strangely enough, when Uranium One requested approval from CFIUS by the federal government, Ian Telfer, a major Clinton Foundation donor, was chairman of the board, a position he continues to hold.
Where’s the kickback for the Clintons? Federal election law forbids political candidates from soliciting, accepting or receiving donations from foreign nationals or foreign entities under any circumstances. (This law applies whether the political candidate knows about the donations or not.) But it doesn’t say they can’t receive lucrative donations to their foundations, extravagant speech remunerations or political assistance through foreign lobbyists who are even now active in Washington and aiding their campaigns.
The Clintons have mastered the crime of laundering political donations through foreign lobbyists. Hillary was caught red-handed doing this way back in 2008 as a U.S. senator, when she met with two of her top money men, who were a part of a lobbying team hired by the rulers of Dubai – who, in turn, paid the firm more than $3.7 million for a year’s work.
In fact, Hillary’s private emails released over this past year show a plethora of exchanges with foreign lobbyists. One can easily see now how her job as secretary of state was also likely another premeditated global Clinton strategy to position foreign powers and lobbyists for her run for the presidency.
Clinton cash corruption plays both sides of the coin. Even a host of American companies with global interests gave millions to the Clintons while simultaneously soliciting the State Department.
“At least 60 companies that lobbied the State Department during her tenure donated a total of more than $26 million to the Clinton Foundation,” according to a Wall Street Journal analysis of public and foundation disclosures.
In 2000, Bill and Hillary Clinton left the presidency with millions of dollars in debt. Since then, they’ve amassed over $130 million. Think about it!
Where did it all come from? Many assume it was big-dollar book deals and benign domestic speaking engagements that were the sources of the abundance.
Hillary once explained it this way: “We came out of the White House not only dead-broke, but in debt. We had no money when we got there and we struggled to piece together the resources for mortgages, for houses, for Chelsea’s education. It was not easy.”
But the truth about Clinton’s massive financial growth is far from a bona-fide rags-to-riches American dream story.
In “Clinton Cash,” Schweizer “follows the Clinton money trail, revealing the connection between their personal fortune, their ‘close personal friends,’ the Clinton Foundation, foreign nations, and some of the highest ranks of government.”
The Clinton-Russian-uranium deal is only one example of their disturbing global, personal and financial swindles outlined in Schweizer’s book. There were others in Kazakhstan, Colombia, Haiti and various countries in the “wild west” fringe of the global economy.
In short, the Clintons have been bought and sold by foreign powers, many of whom have little concern for America beyond their own private interests. And now, amidst this presidential campaign, the Clintons are selling themselves again as prostitutes amid a political market, finding the highest bidders among lobbyists and special interest groups – foreign and domestic.
What is Clinton response to these global financial abuse allegations? “Partisan attack,” of course. No surprise there.
The saddest, strangest and most surreal moment of them all is how hundreds of thousands of gullible American donors are duped to dole out millions of their hard-earned dollars to the Clintons presidential campaign without any hesitation.
That is why Hillary has been called the new Teflon Clinton: Nothing sticks to her. Some say that no matter how great her corruption or culpability, she’s politically untouchable, just like her husband. White House affairs and scandals, Benghazi, email scandals, Clinton Foundation financial abuses, pandering to foreign lobbyists, etc. The Clintons do appear immune to scandals.
Despite the media’s proliferation of these Clinton news stories, I can only believe that most Americans still don’t know about Hillary’s shortcomings, manipulations and cover-ups. But these things should easily raise serious questions about both Hillary and Bill’s judgment, integrity, character, inappropriate indebtedness to multiple foreign powers, and ultimately, about their overall fitness for the highest public office in our land.
I may be overly optimistic, but I believe, just like patriots rose up against a Clinton in 1781, Americans will wise up to the Clintons in 2016 before it’s too late, and they hand over power and control of the colonies. At least, that is my hope, prayer and one of the greatest goals of my column this new year: to help people distinguish between the fact and fantasy behind corrupt candidates like Hillary.
I implore people to read “Clinton Cash.” Then ask yourself: Would you let someone run your household – let alone your country – if they were that reckless and corrupt with others’ and their own finances?
A president must not only be a commander in chief, but a CEO of one of the largest economic engines in the world. But there’s also more to making America great again than fine-tuning the fiscal welfare in our country. We need someone in the Oval Office who has character and integrity, and can restore the position of the presidency before they restore our country’s greatness.
When I think of the Clintons, I’m reminded of the haunting words of our Founding Fathers and, in particular, America’s first two presidents.
John Adams said the people “have a right, an indisputable, unalienable, indefeasible, divine right to that most dreaded and envied kind of knowledge – I mean of the character and conduct of their rulers.”
Even more poignant are the words of George Washington: “Few men have virtue to withstand the highest bidder.”